By HANNAH MEISEL
Capitol News Illinois
hmeisel@capitolnewsillinois.com
CHICAGO – Over the last 2 ½ months, the jury in former Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan’s corruption trial has heard the longtime Democratic leader’s voice dozens of times on wiretapped phone calls and in secretly recorded video footage.
Since October, jurors have seen the longtime powerbroker as he sat taking notes or otherwise watching testimony from nearly 60 witnesses from his seat at the head of his defense table in a wood-paneled federal courtroom.
But on Tuesday, the jury was finally able to fully observe Madigan – including the mannerisms and idiosyncratic speech patterns his attorney has accused the feds of willfully misinterpreting – as he took the stand in his own defense.
“Did you ever trade your public office for private gain?” Madigan attorney Dan Collins asked his client almost immediately after beginning his line of questioning early Tuesday afternoon.
“No,” Madigan said, turning to the jury as he gave his answer.
“Did you ever demand a thing of value in exchange for a promise to take official action?”
“No,” Madigan replied again before giving the same answer when asked if he’d ever accepted a “thing of value” in exchange for such a promise.
Collins repeated similar bursts of questions several more times before trial adjourned for the day, often pausing after the former speaker’s final denial, letting his “no” hang in the air before moving on to the next subject area.
Bribery charges
The repeated questions – and Madigan’s consistent answers – were aimed at refuting prosecutors’ main theory of bribery, which makes up nearly a third of the 23 counts Madigan faces. The indictment, first filed in March 2022 but expanded later that year, alleges Madigan helped electric utility Commonwealth Edison and telecom giant AT&T Illinois pass key legislation through Springfield in exchange for jobs and contracts for Madigan allies.
Additionally, prosecutors claim Madigan used his elected and political power to recruit clients for his property tax appeals law firm. The feds allege that Madigan – along with longtime Springfield lobbyist Mike McClain, who was indicted on six of the 23 counts – formed a “criminal enterprise” meant to enhance Madigan’s power in addition to enriching himself and those close to him.
Government lawyers have portrayed Madigan as an all-powerful leader who controlled an entire branch of state government as well as the political careers of hundreds of Democrats during his 36 years as House speaker. Meanwhile, Madigan’s attorneys have attempted to undermine that portrayal in their cross-examinations of 50 government witnesses and their defense case that began shortly before the holidays.
Madigan’s decision to testify furthers that work, but it’s a risky move. When prosecutors get their turn to cross-examine the former speaker as early as Wednesday, they will likely attempt to impeach him on the stand after Madigan directly contradicted testimony from several witnesses who’ve testified thus far.
‘I tried to help’
Madigan’s surprise testimony began with Collins asking him if, throughout his five-decade career, people often asked him for help.
“When people asked me for help, if possible, I tried to help them,” the longtime speaker said.
Prosecutors devoted entire weeks of trial to showing the jury hundreds of emails and dozens of wiretapped calls involving job recommendations Madigan made to ComEd, mostly through McClain, who for decades had been the utility’s top contract lobbyist. Prosecutors lined up dates of lucrative job offers and contracts given to Madigan allies with key votes for ComEd-backed bills in Springfield in an effort to show the utility bribed Madigan.
The feds also allege AT&T Illinois hired former state Rep. Eddie Acevedo, D-Chicago, in a similar, albeit much smaller, scheme before the telecom giant won a legislative victory in 2017.
But on Tuesday, Madigan said those job requests were part of countless recommendations he’d made over the course of his career, claiming that he never even knew that AT&T hired Acevedo in 2017 after he’d referred the newly retired legislator to McClain for help placing him.
“When did you become aware that AT&T had given a contract to Eddie Acevedo?” Collins asked.
“As part of this case,” Madigan answered.
“Did you ever ask AT&T to give a contract to Eddie Acevedo in exchange for a promise on your part to take official action?” Collins asked.
“No,” Madigan replied.
The feds claim Acevedo was one of several Madigan allies who did little to no work while on contract with AT&T and ComEd. Madigan also denied knowing they failed to perform work until the details of the feds’ investigation became public.
“Mike, there’s been some suggestion in this trial that Frank Olivo did little to no work,” Collins asked, referring to a former 13th Ward alderman from Madigan’s power base on Chicago’s Southwest Side. “What’s your reaction to that?”
“Very angry,” Madigan said.
“Angry towards whom?” Collins asked.
Madigan said he was angry to find out that Olivo – his longtime neighbor – did no work during the nearly eight years he spent on contract with ComEd lobbyist Jay Doherty. Doherty also served as a conduit for payments for three other Madigan allies at various times until mid-2019.
“Because I knew Frank for years,” Madigan explained. “Frank knew that I worked all the time. And that I expected people associated with me to work all the time. He knew that and given that knowledge, he should’ve been working. He should’ve done his job.”
Madigan said the same of former 13th Ward precinct captain Ray Nice, who began receiving payments indirectly from ComEd in 2014. In both cases, Madigan confirmed that the men had come to him asking for help finding a job, and that he’d given their resumes to McClain. Nice also ended up under Doherty’s contract.
Doherty was convicted of bribing Madigan alongside McClain and two other former ComEd executives in last year’s “ComEd Four” trial.
Madigan also directly contradicted testimony from another former 13th Ward precinct captain, Ed Moody, who’d told the jury in November that he’d expressed concern to Madigan in early 2018 that he wasn’t working for his paycheck from ComEd.
Moody testified that by that time, he had spent nearly six years shuffling between ComEd lobbyists – beginning with McClain before stints with Doherty and two others close to Madigan – never having done much beyond rudimentary calls and passing out flyers during the first year or so of receiving monthly $4,500 checks.
$1.3 million in contracts
In all, the five alleged do-nothing contractors, which also included former Chicago Ald. Mike Zalewski, collected more than $1.3 million from ComEd.
But Madigan denied ever having bumped into Moody when he was out canvassing near Madigan’s House in early 2018 and answered in an emphatic “no” when asked flat out if he’d ever had that conversation with Moody.
The former speaker said ComEd and AT&T’s legislative victories – as well as his own votes on the bills – were a result of both support the companies built over years and the work his top attorneys did to make sure the companies weren’t getting away with too much.
Madigan had previously testified that one of his first jobs after law school was as an attorney with the Illinois Commerce Commission, which regulates utilities. He also said that he was particularly distrustful of ComEd after he felt the company had “engaged in deceit” after Illinois deregulated electric utilities in 1997.
But that didn’t mean he’d automatically block ComEd’s legislative priorities; he just wanted to keep a close eye on them. For example, when ComEd executive Anne Pramaggiore told Madigan about the utility’s desire to build a new “Smart Grid” in 2010, Madigan said he could see the merits of a major investment, particularly because power outages were a problem in his district. Renewable energy sources were also coming online at the time.
“I told our chief counsel to not trust ComEd,” he said of the directive he gave before negotiations began on the 2011 bill that would change how electric rates were determined in Illinois. “Be suspicious and work to draft legislation that would guarantee they’d do what they (ComEd) said they were going to do.”
ComEd executive-turned-FBI mole Fidel Marquez testified in November that it was clear to higher-ups at ComEd that Madigan’s job recommendations were important to the company’s legislative goals. But Madigan refuted that.
“Did you believe any employer who hired someone you recommended ever did so in order for you to take official action?” Collins asked.
“No,” Madigan replied.
Personal history
During opening statements in October, Madigan attorney Tom Breen told the jury that Madigan was the product of his time and had an unusual way of speaking that was non-confrontational. The comment was meant to explain why Madigan replied “yeah, okay” to then-Chicago Ald. Danny Solis when the politician-turned-FBI mole explained that a real estate developer Madigan was courting understood “how this works, you know, the quid pro quo.”
“I guess the government thinks Madigan should’ve punched him out or something,” Breen said during opening statements. “No, Mike doesn’t talk that way, he doesn’t act that way.”
Tuesday afternoon’s proceedings ended before Collins could question Madigan about the Solis-related charges, but early in questioning he laid the groundwork to again frame his client as non-confrontational.
Collins asked about Madigan’s upbringing in his strict Irish Catholic home where his parents “never told me that they loved me.” His father, Madigan testified, was a former alcoholic who “quit drinking but he carried an anger problem.” As a result, young Madigan learned to “never disagree with him” and say “‘yeah, yeah, yeah, yes sir,” just to get out of the conversation.”
Madigan attributed his reserved personality to his father, along with his capacity for “hard work and discipline.” Many former staffers who’ve testified have described Madigan as hardworking.
The former speaker testified about getting his start in Democratic politics under his father, a streets and sanitation supervisor for the 13th Ward, and his early years in Springfield between serving as a delegate to the 1970 Constitutional Convention and his subsequent election to the Illinois House. Madigan wouldn’t become speaker until 1983.
He also told the jury personal details about meeting his wife Shirley in the 1970s and marrying her after a “real quick romance.” Shirley had a contentious divorce and was a single mother to a daughter named Lisa, whom Madigan would formally adopt before nurturing her political career decades later. Lisa Madigan served as attorney general for four terms.
Madigan’s testimony also had moments of levity, like when the octogenarian joked to the jury that he was “a young 82,” and when he laughed in response to questions about former Govs. Rod Blagojevich and Bruce Rauner. Madigan had significant conflict with both during their years in office.
“It was, uh, it was a memorable experience,” Madigan said between laughs when asked to describe his relationship with Blagojevich, the Democratic governor who infamously went to prison for his own corruption scandal. “It was very difficult.”
The former speaker said Blagojevich was particularly concerned that Lisa Madigan would run against him for governor and that out of fear, he “went on a public relations campaign to defame the Madigan name.”
Capitol News Illinois is a nonprofit, nonpartisan news service that distributes state government coverage to hundreds of news outlets statewide. It is funded primarily by the Illinois Press Foundation and the Robert R. McCormick Foundation.
